Perverted Perspective on NJ Millionaires Tax

NJTV had a ‘progressive’ discussing the need for a ‘millionaires tax’ (now abandoned) in New Jersey that stopped me cold when it got to:
.

.
You may recall New Jersey Policy Perspective (NJPP) as being the people behind a 2014 report claiming that New Jersey’s non-public-safety plans “rank 95th in pension generosity out of 100 top plans nationally” based on criteria they made up.

So where is their report on the millionaires tax?

All I could find on the NJPP website is this one from May, 2018 which concludes:

The proposed new marginal gross income tax rate on incomes over $1 million was popular with legislators during the Christie administration, as it was passed five times by both houses of the legislature and vetoed each time. Now, after recent changes to the federal tax code, some legislators fear that this is not the right time to raise state income taxes on those earning $1 million or more a year. These fears are unfounded: New Jersey’s top one-percent of taxpayers still receive a net tax cut when combining the effects of the recent federal tax overhaul and Gov. Murphy’s proposed tax changes. According to a side-by-side analysis of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act and Gov. Murphy’s plan, the top one percent of taxpayers –those earning over $924,000 a year and with an average annual income of about $2.5 million –would still come out ahead. That’s because their average tax break from the federal tax law is slightly larger than their average tax increase at the state level. Some of these wealthy households may experience a slight tax increase depending on their specific circumstances, but as a whole, the top one percent would not be burdened under Gov. Murphy’s tax plan. In fact, they would see little to no change to their overall tax bill, while New Jersey’s most important assets would see a much-needed boost in funding.

There are no calculations to back up that claim except for a chart they made up with conveniently random cohorts:

 

Full discussion on millionaires tax:
.

44 responses to this post.

  1. NJPP has ignored much to do with regressive/progressive NJ tax systems. Makes you wonder who is running that group now?

    Reply

  2. Posted by boscoe on July 14, 2019 at 10:56 pm

    So what is it exactly that Sue Altman said that you find fault with? What did she say that is demonstrably false?

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on July 14, 2019 at 11:46 pm

      I guess that she seems to ignore that “some” very rich people will and HAVE left ……….. such as David Tepper.

      He moved his Hedge Fund – Appaloosa Management to Miami from NJ. He earned $700 million from his hedge fund in 2016. Looks like NJ lost about $70 Million in State Taxes in just that one year.

      Reply

      • Posted by E on July 15, 2019 at 1:58 am

        Smart guy. I plan on (not definite do to not knowing where my kids end up) also moving out of state. Disclosure, the state will miss me sooooooooo much less than Tepper!!!

        Reply

        • Posted by stanley on July 15, 2019 at 9:59 am

          They might thank you for leaving. Oh I know that you are a highly skilled watcher of cars driving by the construction site. Maybe you’ll have to train a replacement. Probably take a couple of years.

          Reply

          • Posted by E on July 15, 2019 at 12:53 pm

            I would say ignorance is bliss Stanley, but you seem to be a jealous doomsday prepper who really knows better but can’t help themselves so the pot shots come out. Even though I don’t, or anybody else on here, know what you do/did for a living that makes you feel this way.

          • Posted by stanley on July 15, 2019 at 2:24 pm

            I am not envious (or jealous). I am well aware that the tycoons have it better than I at least in terms of material wealth and I am perfectly OK with that. As far as comparing myself to typical Americans–I don’t know how nor am I trying to find a way to evaluate such a topic.

            Public employees come on here and defend their untenable divine right to loot the community and the least I can do is poke fun at the arrangement. The tax paying public cannot afford you high priced jokers. OK, buddy?

          • Posted by E on July 15, 2019 at 3:58 pm

            High prices joker? Maybe. Tycoon? No.
            And you being a ardent individualist, why don’t you support a persons right to get what they can earn for themselves and out that ahead of the “common good”. Seems to me your beef should be those who commit crimes and cheat people. I don’t do that. This public sector joker really doesn’t care what people think of his income. Long as the those zeros keep coming. Here in NJ suburbia, the grass IS greener and the incomes and home prices are higher. The Gold Coast!!
            My comeuppance? Hahaha.
            If it ever happens, trust me, I’m good with saving for a rainy day my friend. With PFRS, the clouds will be kept at bay. You spend a lot of time worrying about the next correction….just save for it and then enjoy life. Join me at a blackjack table for a few hands and some free drinks, instead of counting your ammo and boxes of dry pasta. There is time for both my friend.
            Look how much NJ is making from Sportsbook. Lol. I myself have turned $2000 into $7000 in the past year. Not a big whale, just like to dabble. Go fishing. Relax. Take TL with you. I’m a freshwater guy myself.

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 15, 2019 at 7:10 pm

            Stanley,

            THAT was excellent, especially THIS part……

            “Public employees come on here and defend their untenable divine right to loot the community and the least I can do is poke fun at the arrangement. The tax paying public cannot afford you high priced jokers. ….”

          • Posted by E on July 15, 2019 at 9:08 pm

            Brrrr….I thought my AC was turned up. Little did I know it was only the windbag crawling out from beneath her rock.
            Maybe you and Stanley should be the couple who gets a room….although I’m thrice the man he claims to be. He will regale you with tails of bunkers and doomsday. And how climate change is just a hoax, as we bake in yet another broiling summer.
            Funny how you and him disagree on causes of climate change (a scientific fact) but you are still best buds. And you and I disagree on pensions and you can’t stand me. Hmm…we each disagree w you on just one topic but I am the pariah. Even through climate change is a much worse problem than pension issues. Why is that TL? Why do kiss his ass? Hmmm…ahh, must be that authority thing. Sad really.

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 15, 2019 at 9:50 pm

            And YOU El gaupo,can try to enthrall me with stories of how you “earned” your high wages and off-the-wall generous pension & benefits. Nah, “collusion” between your UNION and the Elected Officials had “nothing to do with it”, right ?

            Then your can mesmerize me with how single-handed while spider-jumping from building to building you can detail the EXACT reconstruction of a car crash …. that only YOU have that really really hard-to-acquire knowledge that can be brought to the Table. Oh those Private Sector insurers are assuredly going to be throwing money at your feet to acquire your grand expertise………. lol

            What a laugh …… Stanley calling you “high-priced joker” was right on the money.joker”

          • Posted by E on July 16, 2019 at 7:19 am

            Definitely would be more than you can handle. The handsome one is in a class by himself in that department. Unfortunately for you I’m not available. You’ll have to stick w the legend in his own mind. The real man is taken.
            And as much as I would try, listening to you regale me with 4x private sector pensions, private sector is so hard, moocher, S5 sucks, blah blah blah, would kill the mood. 😶. Maybe in some other life if I come back as a private sector working class hero like you, Ms high finance. lol.

          • Posted by E on July 16, 2019 at 7:25 am

            Keeping with the “tradition” of double posting., try this :
            Call up your car insurance company and ask if they have a demand for certified crash reconstructionists experts who can testify in court. And see who compromises the majority of those experts. Betcha 80% of them are retired cops. Please call and don’t take my word for it.
            When I was on the Fatal accident squad there were 24 of us in the whole county of Bergen. You can do the math. If not, we can talk it over, over a nice dinner at Bobby Flay steak in Borgata. Oh yeah…1) taken and loyal 2) you probably really are not so much fun 💨

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 16, 2019 at 9:20 am

            WAY too much of the stuff presented in Court under the guise of “experts” is ……. “junk science”.

          • Posted by E on July 16, 2019 at 11:37 am

            Probably one of the dumbest comments you’ve ever made here. Educate yourself….you must have extensive education and experience to be deemed in a court of law to be an expert. Ask any doctor. Again, when renewing your insurance, give them a call and ask them about the SIU division and what that entails. It is generally the most serious crashes that get shifted there and the ones that raise red flags to the claims adjusters. The guys and gals wearing the big boy pants will be in that division. No junk science there. I can assure. But being someone that you think is untruthful, don’t take my word for it. Call them. Trust me you are not half as smart as you think you are. And I am twice as smart as you think I am. But please, call them. See who makes up these units, what the criteria is and how much they get paid. If u don’t want to do that, call up ANY attorney in the field and ask how much they pay them for their testimony and what they think of them overall. Then come back and tell me about junk science.
            That’s the kind of crap you dish out when you have no idea what the hell you are talking about. Lol

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 16, 2019 at 7:41 pm

            Quoting El gaupo ………….

            “Probably one of the dumbest comments you’ve ever made here. Educate yourself….you must have extensive education and experience to be deemed in a court of law to be an expert. ”

            Go ahead, pat yourself on the back, look in the mirror and tell yourself how great you are.

            Then how come in Civil suits each side can always present an “expert” who supports the side who hired them and claim the OTHER side must be wrong. If they are BOTH “experts” then “experts” are wrong 50% of the time.

            Just mercenaries for hire that will “find a way” to support the position of the side that hired them.
            ————————————-

            P.S. I’d love to see you (and 3 other “experts”) each independently re-construct a somewhat unusual car crash involving several cars. I’d bet they would far from “agree” on many details ……………. which means their “expert” reconstructions are assuredly of VERY questionable value. ……….. and “expertise” is mostly self-claimed.

          • Posted by E on July 17, 2019 at 12:51 am

            Shows how ignorant you really are To be deemed an expert (no quotes needed here), the opposing attorney must agree or at least challenge your qualifications and the judge decides before your testimony can be admissible in court.
            And yes, just like any other expert offering testimony, I would be a mercenary. Civil cases are different. In the criminal realm, my sole purpose is to uncover the truth. I have no interest whatsoever in condemning an innocent person.
            Testimony provided in a civil case is of course going to be presented in a way that benifits the client paying the bills. If that isn’t possible, the expert will not testify. It is the job of the opposing attorney to discredit the testimony and provide an expert of his or her own to refute it. Then the jury decides who is believeable and either awards money or not. The thing is that you are under oath and a good opposing attorney will be able to poke holes in any inconsistent testimony.
            You are out of your league here. You know precious little about how the law, both criminal and civil actually works. Stick to finance. At least you can pretend to know what your talking about and come off as “smart”. Although I’m not fooled. I think you can be a real cantankerous boob sometimes. Time for Marine1 to keep you in your lane. Lol

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 17, 2019 at 6:12 am

            El Gaupo,

            Nonsense. There is only ONE set of correct facts, meaning that one of the “experts” (WITH quotes) is wrong or outright lying. Bottom line 50% of expert testimony is false.

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 17, 2019 at 6:28 am

            El gaupo, you’re all so called………… “experts”.

            WHERE was the fairness and justice for THIS man?

            https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/17/us/philadelphia-chester-hollman-iii-released/index.html

            Quoting from the article:

            “They noted that an anonymous caller told police the name of the driver less than 24 hours after the crime, but that tip was never shared with defense attorneys, prosecutors said in a recent court filing.

            Assistant District Attorney Patricia Cummings, head of the office’s conviction integrity unit, told reporters Monday that it was “pretty clear” that Hollman might never have stood trial if police and prosecutors working on the case had disclosed some of the evidence they had to the defense.”

            Why should the cops who never shared that tip with Defense attorneys get away with that scott-free? Why shouldn’t THEY now go to jail and have their pensions paid to THEIR dictum instead of to themselves?

          • Posted by E on July 17, 2019 at 7:38 am

            Uh…because it is the prosecutor’s (and the defense attorney) responsibility to provide discovery(I hope you know what that means, if not google it, I’m not telling you) not the police officer. He is a mere witness. In court, he is strictly there to answer the prosecutor’s questions during direct examination and then the defense attorneys questions during cross examination. Nothing to do with “collecting their pensions”. With each passing comment, you show how little you know the system. Is it perfect? No. That’s why the defendant is given the benefit of the doubt and the responsibility to prove beyond a reasonable doubt lies with the State. (Who is the ONLY entity allowed to bring Criminal charges).
            I think we debated the whole expert thing ad nauseam here. Enough already. We hijacked this entire thread once again. No one even reads this crap but you and me. What I tell you is fact. Not opinion. What I feel about my pension is in fact opinion. The definition of an expert is a FACT. What you may feel about an expert or “expert” is your opinion. Which I feel is skewed because you are jealous of me and no matter what, your default position is to disagree with me because 1) I’m a public employee and more specifically a police officer and 2) you just don’t like me and 3) you a have serious inferiority complex.
            If I came on here saying experts were wrong half the time etc, your knee jerk position would be to defend them. Like you do the pension “experts” who said these plans would be belly up 10 years ago. Wow. Their wrong half the time. Google this stuff and then honestly tell me if I’m wrong. And I like I’m responsible for the small minority of cops who fuck up….even though I’ve never been a defender of them. In all honesty, you really don’t seem like a happy (or nice) person the majority of the time.

          • Posted by E on July 17, 2019 at 7:53 am

            And by the way…..wouldn’t these mercenaries really be private sector heroes???? Just trying to make a buck? Like a car salesman, shop owner etc?? How could have such disdain for private sector folks TL??? And the lawyers?? And finance guys who sell folks shit they don’t need? Are they mercenaries?? By your definition YES
            Or is it just the retired cops who incur your wrath?? Such a fraud.

          • Posted by E on July 17, 2019 at 7:59 am

            Here is TL:

            Please Mr Bury, please tell that big bad policeman that he doesn’t earn his money and that he shouldn’t make what he does, please Mr Bury? And how women like me do!! Because I’m worth it and he is not. Please tell him. Please.
            What a joke you are TL. Pathetic really.

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 17, 2019 at 8:14 am

            OR …………… perhaps Mr. Bury agrees with you (which I doubt) that NJ police should get DB pensions that are ROUTINELY 4 times greater in value upon retirement than those granted the lucky few comparably situated (in wages, years of service, and age at retirement) Private Sector workers still in unfrozen DB Plans, and with that 4 times rising to 5 to 10 times greater than the retirement security granted to MOST Private Sector workers only via 401K Plans today.

            What makes YOU so “special” and deserving of a better deal (a MUCH MUCH MCUH better deal) ….. on the Taxpayers’ Dime?

            And ……………… why should Taxpayers fund ANY retire healthcare benefit for you when employer-provided retiree healthcare subsidies (beyond for some a few Hundred $ deposited into an HSA) are almost unheard of today?

            Again, what makes YOU so “special” and deserving of a better deal (a MUCH MUCH MCUH better deal) ….. on the Taxpayers’ Dime?

          • Posted by E on July 17, 2019 at 8:34 am

            Ugh….enough already. We covered this topic. It is your OPINION. See you next thread. Done w this one. 🙄 what a bore

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 17, 2019 at 8:40 am

            What’s the matter El gaupo ………… don’t want to hear Mr. Bury’s thoughts on the CENTRAL ISSUE underlying all of our comments ?

            ………. that your Total Compensation (with your wages ALONE higher than necessary or reasonable, and your pension & benefit completely off-the-wall too generous) is LUDICROUSLY excessive?
            ———————————-

            Yes, that’s MY opinion, and I would love to hear Mr. Bury’s.

      • Posted by boscoe on July 15, 2019 at 8:09 am

        “Some” very rich people are constantly moving their domiciles. Some very rich people are hiding assets and income offshore. Would Tepper have moved if his official marginal rate of 8.97% had remained at that level? Maybe, who knows?

        Reply

  3. Posted by Anonymous on July 15, 2019 at 11:35 am

    ITEP is a good source. Their data is probably as good as Tax Foundation, but with a different emphasis.
    Compare the “more balanced” NJ tax structure in this article to Florida’s structure…

    Lowest 20%………12.7%
    Middle 20%……….8.1%
    Top one percent…2.3%

    The average tax burden for all states, in the middle income group, is 9.9 percent.
    In almost every state, the top one percent has a lower tax burden than the middle or lower group. Florida especially, at just 2.3 percent. Only California, Minnesota, New York, and Vermont, have higher taxes for the one percent.

    http://itep.org/wp-content/uploads/whopays-ITEP-2018.pdf

    Reply

    • Posted by NJ2AZ on July 15, 2019 at 4:26 pm

      I imagine if these charts in terms of absolute dollars instead of percentage of income, it would paint a very different picture. Also begs the question: Why do those with more DESERVE to pay more?

      I think those who advocate for higher taxation would do better with a message of “necessary evil” instead of one of ‘entitlement’ (you have more so you deserve to have more taken)

      Reply

  4. Posted by Anonymous on July 15, 2019 at 11:59 am

    Another NJPP study she may be referring to…

    https://www.njpp.org/budget/the-exodus-is-more-like-a-trickle

    Compare that to Cato study on tax migration…

    https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/wealthy-taxpayers-are-fleeing-these-states-droves

    You be the judge.

    Statistics… Go figure!

    Reply

    • Not a study so much as random observations looking to prove a questionable point. Some easily dismissed like:

      “The income level of someone who leaves is not an accurate measure of ‘income migration’ because in most cases a similar income will be earned by whoever fills that person’s job.”

      In that case who is it who has David Tepper’s job here?

      Reply

      • Posted by boscoe on July 15, 2019 at 3:03 pm

        Can we stop with the David Tepper crap already? Do you think there might still be a few hedge fund managers living in NJ, NY and Connecticut? I do. Why is that?

        Reply

    • Posted by Anonymous on July 15, 2019 at 2:33 pm

      Too True.

      For either of the articles.

      There are too many variables.

      In the Cato opinion, it’s not just billionaires leaving, it is “Ken Fisher moved Fisher Investments from California to Washington state, which also has no income tax. The billionaire said he wanted a lower-tax location for his 2,000 employees.”

      May be.

      According to ITEP, for the lowest four quintiles, the tax burden is higher in Washington than in California.* For the top quintile, the burden is lower. MUCH lower for the one percent. If you can trust the numbers at all.

      The biggest problem, though, in California and New Jersey, and others, relying heavily on the top earners makes revenue extremely volatile. If, as Cato says, “The top 1 percent in New Jersey pay 37 percent of the state’s income taxes.” And the top one percent relies largely on investment income, what happens in a down market?

      *Damb averages again, ITEP:

      “STATES COMMENDED AS “LOW-TAX” ARE OFTEN HIGH-TAX FOR LOW AND MIDDLE-INCOME FAMILIES. The 10 states with the highest taxes on the
      poor are Arizona, Florida, Hawaii, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania,
      Texas, and Washington. Six of these are also among the “terrible ten” because they are
      not only high-tax for the poorest, they are also low-tax for their richest residents.”

      Reply

      • Posted by NJ2AZ on July 15, 2019 at 4:35 pm

        Representing Arizona: we rely largely on sales taxes, which doesn’t bother me in the slightest.

        We had a ridiculous ballot initiative last year to nearly double our top income tax rate and thankfully our supreme court killed it for being misleading. Then again, i don’t agree that my dentist deserves to pay more in taxes just because he makes more than I do.

        Reply

        • Posted by PS Drone on July 15, 2019 at 10:41 pm

          Off topic, but germane to AZ – LEO union mentality running amok again:

          https://www.theburningplatform.com/2019/07/15/protecting-serving-each-other/#more-200495

          Reply

          • Posted by E on July 16, 2019 at 8:34 am

            I saw the video of that at the time. Looks bad. Guy seemed to be pulling up his pants after they told him to move. Should’ve had him lie flat on his belly with his arms out. Then one officer cover while the other handcuff.
            I think the settlement has more to do with the attorneys than the unions. The city was told that it would be cheaper to pension the guy out than to potentially lose a lawsuit because some jury thought that he was acquitted he didn’t do anything wrong. The unions had very little influence as to whether he got a pension. That is the decision of the city attorney as to give it to him or go to trial. And his attorneys job is to get him that pension.
            Those are the facts. Please don’t use this case as some sort of anti union propaganda, not the case here.

          • Posted by Tough Love on July 16, 2019 at 9:17 am

            I saw that video when it first came out. I feel no less horrible about it today than I did then. To me it appeared that the Officer was ….. INSTEAD of taking numerous OTHER avenues to safely take that man into custody ….. looking for an excuse to shoot him.

          • Posted by E on July 16, 2019 at 10:38 am

            I disagree. I think he either got nervous or didn’t pay attention during training. No way was the guy looking for an excuse to shoot someone. That is NEVER the case and is almost always because the cop thought he saw something, gave conflicting orders and overall was nervous. Nothing can simulate the real thing. But ultimately he is responsible for pulling th trigger. No one else. He (they) should’ve had the suspect lie flat on his stomach with his hands flat and extended away from his body. Real gun, fake gun, no gun that is the safest way to do it. Officers cover the suspect and one or two can advance and handcuff. If during this time, the suspect makes a move to his waistband then all bets are off. Certainly NOT looking for an excuse to kill a man and the unions have NO say as to his reinstatement to get a pension. That is all the attorneys.
            Just again a reminder that this job is no fucking joke and you really need to have high standards when hiring people. Maybe higher than they are now.

          • Posted by E on July 16, 2019 at 10:44 am

            And why there is such a premium placed on supervision in this job. There is trusty no substitute for experience. Tragically, with human beings performing this job, there will always be mistakes. Doesn’t mean we can excuse them or learn from them so it doesn’t happen again. Sad. Most of the time these things happen because someone didn’t listen to commands. This guy didn’t do anything that would warrant lethal force against him. He did exactly what they told him to do. In this type of situation, there is a standard approach to arresting a compliant suspect. As I said, flat down with arms extended than officers can slowly advance and arrest without incident.

          • Posted by NJ2AZ on July 16, 2019 at 9:55 pm

            i too watched this. made me sick to my stomach.

            Is the concept of deescalation complete omitted from all LEO training?

          • Posted by E on July 17, 2019 at 12:40 am

            No. It is taught. Unfortunately, this officer was not trained well and was probably very nervous. Terrible tactics used here. The guy was obeying all police commands and should never have been shot. As I said to TL, hiring the right people is paramount and training them correctly is as well. Tragic. Guy was complying. Should’ve been told to lie flat on his stomach with his arms outstretched. Then cover/contact should’ve been used to effect the arrest. Pension and benifits cuts and salary cuts will not help ensure that the qualified folks will take the job. Police are in the business of responding to incidents where things have gone wrong. These types of incidents must be avoided as much as possible.

    • Posted by bpaterson on July 16, 2019 at 1:55 pm

      copy and paste this blurb from NJPPs outmigration study: • “The top 10 locations favored by former New Jerseyans include four states with taxes comparable to New Jersey: New York, California, Maryland and Massachusetts”………And they even listed the top 10 with qty of NJ residents moving to the other state. NY being #1 and PA#2, the move is to the hinderlands of these states where prop taxes are really minimum. This i hear from those that come back to visit.

      Reply

  5. Posted by dentss dennigan on July 15, 2019 at 3:10 pm

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/jersey-cop-overdosed-heroin-patrol-130155969.html

    “Meanwhile the taxpayers are on the hook for TWO retirements for this guy.”

    Reply

  6. Posted by Anonymous on July 15, 2019 at 8:26 pm

    Many millionaires are millionaires for me year only. For example someone who owns a house free and clear for a long period of time. When they sell, for one year they have a million dollar income.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: